Torts & Tort Damages Flashcards
7 cards from real NYLE practice questions. Tap to flip, then mark Knew It or Still Learning — missed cards come back until you master them.
Read the first 7 Torts & Tort Damages flashcards as text
In New York, which of the following most accurately describes a 'superseding cause' that would break the chain of proximate causation?
Answer: An unforeseeable intervening act that alone produces the plaintiff's harm
A superseding cause is an intervening act that is so unforeseeable that it is unjust to hold the original defendant liable for the resulting harm.
Under New York's wrongful death statute (EPTL § 5-4.1), who has standing to bring a wrongful death action?
Answer: The personal representative of the decedent's estate, on behalf of distributees
EPTL § 5-4.1 vests the right to bring a wrongful death action exclusively in the personal representative of the decedent's estate for the benefit of distributees.
A New York court applies the 'eggshell plaintiff' (thin skull) rule. Which statement best captures its effect?
Answer: Defendants take the plaintiff as they find them and are liable for full damages even if a pre-existing condition made injuries far worse
The eggshell plaintiff rule holds defendants liable for the full extent of injuries even if the plaintiff's pre-existing condition made those injuries unforeseeable in their severity.
In a New York strict products liability action based on design defect, the plaintiff must prove that a reasonable alternative design existed. This requirement reflects which test?
Answer: The risk-utility test
New York uses the risk-utility test for design defect claims, which requires showing that a reasonable alternative design would have reduced the risk without excessive cost or loss of utility.
A defendant negligently injures a plaintiff who then refuses medically recommended surgery that would significantly reduce damages. Under New York law, this affects damages how?
Answer: The plaintiff's recovery is reduced by the damages that would have been avoided had the plaintiff undergone the reasonable treatment
New York's mitigation of damages doctrine requires plaintiffs to take reasonable steps to minimize their losses; failure to do so reduces recoverable damages accordingly.
Under New York law, a plaintiff seeking to impose liability on a municipality for a dangerous sidewalk condition must establish:
Answer: Prior written notice of the specific defect to the municipality, unless an exception applies
Most New York municipalities have prior written notice laws requiring plaintiffs to show the municipality received written notice of the specific defect before liability attaches.
In New York, a plaintiff sues for negligent infliction of emotional distress after witnessing a family member injured by defendant's negligence. The plaintiff must generally show:
Answer: That the defendant's negligence exposed them to an unreasonable risk of bodily injury (zone of danger) and that they witnessed the serious injury or death of an immediate family member
Under Bovsun v. Sanperi, a New York bystander may recover for negligently caused emotional distress only if she was herself within the zone of danger (exposed to an unreasonable risk of bodily harm) and witnessed the death or serious injury of an immediate family member. Observing a family member's injury from outside the zone of danger is not enough.